Accused killer should be tried as juvenile, attorney says

A 26-year-old Oceanside man accused of gunning down a police officer a decade ago, when he was 16, is asking a judge to send his case to juvenile court.

The defendant, Jose Compre, appeared before Vista Superior Court Judge K. Michael Kirkman on Thursday in a hearing to determine where his case should be handled. Compre’s defense attorney, Mary Ellen Attridge, argued that under Proposition 57 — approved by voters in the Nov. 8 election — a judge, not prosecutors, must decide whether a juvenile can be charged as an adult.

Two weeks before the election, Compre was arrested in the 2006 shooting death of Oceanside police Officer Dan Bessant and charged as an adult in the crime. Because the case hasn’t yet proceeded to trial, the new rules should apply, Attridge said.

“Mr. Compre is asking that the court follow the law, follow Proposition 57, which is the law right now,” she said.

Deputy District Attorney Peter Cross said moving the matter to juvenile court “would be a clear retroactive application” of the law, and that the prosecution made “a legitimate legal decision” to charge Compre as an adult.

Kirkman said the new statute is somewhat murky and that he’ll issue his ruling Feb. 10.

“This (new statute) could have been clearer,” the judge said. “I wish it was — but it wasn’t.”

courtesy photo

Oceanside police Officer Dan Bessant

Oceanside police Officer Dan Bessant (courtesy photo)

The fatal shooting of Bessant, an Oceanside native with a wife and young son, rocked the city 10 years ago. The 25-year-old officer was assisting a fellow officer during a traffic stop in a gang-plagued neighborhood on Dec. 20, 2006, when teenage gang members unexpectedly opened fire on the pair. Bessant was struck and killed.

Two gang members were arrested and charged within days of the murder, but investigators suspected that Compre was also involved in the killing. Charges were eventually filed against him in 2007, but later dismissed for lack of evidence. All three teenagers were under 18, but all had been charged with murder as adults.

The other two — Meki Gaono, 17 at the time of the shooting, and Penifoti "P.J." Taeotui, then 16 — were convicted as adults and sentenced to life in prison.

Last October, as the 10th anniversary of the murder approached, Compre was rearrested after authorities said they found new evidence.

That evidence hasn’t been made public and prosecutors on Thursday declined to tell Kirkman precisely what it is.

Attridge — who successfully defended Compre a decade ago — told Kirkman she expects the case will again be dismissed for lack of evidence, whether it lands in juvenile or adult court.

“This case has not gotten better with age,” she said. “It has only gotten more desperate.”

Even if Compre’s case heads to Juvenile Court, that doesn’t mean it will stay there. After a Juvenile Court judge reviews the case, that judge could decide that Compre should be tried as an adult.

One big difference in the two courts is sentencing. Juvenile Courts are designed around rehabilitation, not incarceration. If Compre is convicted as an adult, he is looking at life without parole.